RALEIGH, N.C. — The N.C. Senate approved a bill Wednesday that would require people applying for public assistance to pass a drug test and would require local Department of Social Service offices to conduct criminal background checks on applicants, according to WRAL.
The drug test requirement calls for applicants to pay for the test and bans anyone with a positive test from receiving benefits for a year, unless they can show they have completed a substance abuse treatment program and can pass a subsequent test.
Under current law, DSS offices may ask someone if they’re a fugitive or conduct a criminal background check, but they are not allowed to share that information with local sheriffs or other law enforcement agencies.
According to WRAL, the House version of the bill called for social service workers to call law enforcement if someone applying for Food and Nutrition Assistance, what many people call food stamps, or Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, which are cash payments, is found to have an outstanding warrant. The Senate version says the Social Services Commission will draft rules for what information will be shared with law enforcement.
Senators voted 43-6 in favor of House Bill 392, which will now head back to the House for a final vote on changes to the measure.http://myfox8.com/2013/07/10/nc-sena...g-for-welfare/

Of the 4,086 applicants who scheduled drug tests while the law was enforced, 108 people, or 2.6 percent, failed, most often testing positive for marijuana. About 40 people scheduled tests but canceled them, according to the Department of Children and Families, which oversees Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, known as the TANF program.

The numbers, confirming previous estimates, show that taxpayers spent $118,140 to reimburse people for drug test costs, at an average of $35 per screening.

The state’s net loss? $45,780.

"That’s not counting attorneys and court fees and the thousands of hours of staff time it took to implement this policy," Newton said.
The law also didn’t impact the number of people who applied for benefits.

The findings don’t ruffle supporters of the law, who say that its primary purpose is to make sure taxpayer money doesn’t supplement drug use.

More information about why everything about this Policy is based off of lies.

Quote:

Drug testing proponents like to argue that there are large numbers of drug users going on welfare to get money to support their habits. The claim feeds into long-standing stereotypes about the kind of people who go on welfare, but it does not appear to have much basis in fact.

Several studies, including a 1996 report from the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism, have found that there is no significant difference in the rate of illegal-drug use by welfare applicants and other people. Another study found that 70% of illegal-drug users between the age of 18 and 49 are employed full time.

Drug-testing laws are often touted as a way of saving tax dollars, but the facts are once again not quite as presented. Idaho recently commissioned a study of the likely financial impact of drug testing its welfare applicants. The study found that the costs were likely to exceed any money saved.

and

Quote:

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, writing for the majority, said that the drug testing was an unreasonable search. The state can impose drug tests in exceptional cases, when there is a public-safety need for them (as with bus and train operators, for instance). But the Fourth Amendment does not allow the state to diminish “personal privacy for a symbol’s sake,” the court said.

The only problem is that they can spend it on alcohol. We cant become the nannies. We are not their parents.

What needs to happen is they don't get their act together, make some positive changes in their life's, take some classes/training.....then we put a limit on how much government assistance they can get in a year and or in a lifetime. Its a hand up not a hand out. If you are not trying to get off the tax payer dime, then you can be a slacker on the charity dime.

Ahh, so glad to hear you say that!

That means we shouldn't be supporting their freeloading asses with welfare, right?

90 percent of people on government entitlements go to the retired, disabled, or members of working households.

It is just a myth that people on welfare are freeloading.

i used to work with a 350 lb. "disabled" woman that's now "retired" at 50 and receiving medicare (don't ask me how) for a "bad knee" that only became bad because she ate herself to 350 lbs. and refused to lose weight

and my Grandma is friends with another "disabled" 400 lb. woman that gets the state to pay for her apartment, car, gas, food, bills and health care because she's "disabled" because she ate herself to 400 lbs.

and my gf used to live with a 40 year old woman WITHOUT ANY KIDS that wasn't obese that lived off WIC (WOMEN, infant and children) stamps for 2 years before my gf got sick of her trying to get out of paying rent with her tax dollars and kicked her out

While there are no doubt plenty of people taking advantage of the system, testing is a waste of time and money. It costs more than it saves and while it might kick a few people off for smoking pot, I think it is safe to assume our prescription drug abusers would be free to continue on their merry way because, after all they have a prescription.

i used to work with a 350 lb. "disabled" woman that's now "retired" at 50 and receiving medicare (don't ask me how) for a "bad knee" that only became bad because she ate herself to 350 lbs. and refused to lose weight

and my Grandma is friends with another "disabled" 400 lb. woman that gets the state to pay for her apartment, car, gas, food, bills and health care because she's "disabled" because she ate herself to 400 lbs.

and my gf used to live with a 40 year old woman WITHOUT ANY KIDS that wasn't obese that lived off WIC (WOMEN, infant and children) stamps for 2 years before my gf got sick of her trying to get out of paying rent with her tax dollars and kicked her out

If you believe someone is gaming the system, then report them through the proper authorities.

But your anecdotal evidence is not a bases to believe the majority of people who receive help do not need it.

__________________
"Most of us can, as we choose, make of this world either a palace or a prison."
–John Lubbock

- out of the entire night of stopping and harrassing hundreds and hundreds of people depending on where it's at, only a handful or 2 are generally arrested, and sometimes it's on something else other than alcohol like a warrant or driving on a suspended license.

- No evidence?? All the evidence you need is to just take a trip down to your local 7/11 and look at the clowns that hang around the store at night. Let's not be stupid here. The reason why some people are below the poverty level is because they're stupid and made bad decisions growing up. Some may be technically out of their hands...tough shit it's not my problem and I don't think I should have to pay for someone else's food unless I choose to.

- out of the entire night of stopping and harrassing hundreds and hundreds of people depending on where it's at, only a handful or 2 are generally arrested, and sometimes it's on something else other than alcohol like a warrant or driving on a suspended license.

I agree with this.

Quote:

Originally Posted by CoMoChief

- No evidence?? All the evidence you need is to just take a trip down to your local 7/11 and look at the clowns that hang around the store at night. Let's not be stupid here. The reason why some people are below the poverty level is because they're stupid and made bad decisions growing up. Some may be technically out of their hands...tough shit it's not my problem and I don't think I should have to pay for someone else's food unless I choose to.

This is just stupid and factually wrong.

__________________
"Most of us can, as we choose, make of this world either a palace or a prison."
–John Lubbock